O

[Anonymous No.10364635]

>logic & reason
What happens when they conflict with each other?

[Anonymous No.10364641]

knowledge

[Anonymous No.10364643]

Probably should define some terms if you want to talk philosophy

[Anonymous No.10364669]

>>10364635
OCD

[Anonymous No.10364674]

>>10364635
What a remarkable picture.

[Anonymous No.10364841]

>>10364635
One wins?

[Anonymous No.10364861]

>>10364635
>logic and reason conflicting
literally how
how the fuck are you defining those words

[Anonymous No.10364874]

>>10364861
valid logic, unreasonable premises
like, for instance, >>10364669
>(intrusive thought) If you don't turn the light off and on 5 times everyone will die
>Even if the axiom isn't true, it's better to be safe than sorry
>Therefore, the right course of action is to turn the light off and on 5 times

[Anonymous No.10365100]

>>10364874
What you're referring to as logic is actually (logical) form. Also usually when people say "unreasonable" they are referring to people not being agreeable, not that they're being irrational.

[Anonymous No.10365107]

Care to explain what you mean? With definitions and examples?

[Anonymous No.10365119]

>>10364841
Whoever wins, we lose.

[Anonymous No.10366496]

>>10364635
You revise your axioms. Or switch to another logic.

[Anonymous No.10366545]

Let's assume there is a God and that the golden rule is an absolute principle. If you break the golden rule you are a hypocrite or illogical. But sometimes even sinning is the more reasonable approach. For instance, if you kill someone who was trying to kill you, you are illogical because you would not want to be killed your self. However, you are still rational because you are remaining lawful or equitable, manifesting a principle of justice (right a wrong with a wrong).
Either way could be considered correct to a moral idealist in their own way, but rationality is preferred.

[Anonymous No.10366670]

>>10364635
You get Analytic philosophy.